Psqe1 of4

CALGARY ASSESSMENT REVIEW BOARD

DECISION WITH REASONS

CARB 2588/2011-P

In the matter of the complaint against the property assessment as provided by the Municipal Government Act, Chapter M-26, Section 460, Revised Statutes of Alberta 2000 (the Act).

between:

Fox, Leonard; and Edelson, Jack; (as represented by Altus Group), COMPLAINANT

and

The City Of Calgary, RESPONDENT

before:

T. Hudson, PRESIDING OFFICER E. Reuther, MEMBER B. Jerchel, MEMBER

This is a complaint to the Calgary Assessment Review Board in respect of a property assessment prepared by the Assessor of The City of Calgary and entered in the 2011 Assessment Roll as follows:

ROLL NUMBER: 091026609

LOCATION ADDRESS: 1155 44 AV SE

HEARING NUMBER: 64680

ASSESSMENT: $2,610,000

PaJj,e 2 of 4 CARB 2588/2011-P

This complaint was heard on the 27thday of September, 2011 at the office of the Assessment Review Board located at Floor Number 4, 1212-31 Avenue NE, Calgary, Alberta, Boardroom 2.

Appeared on behalf of the Complainant:

• R. Worthington • D. Mehwa Appeared on behalf of the Respondent:

• J. Greer

Board's Decision in Respect of Procedural or Jurisdictional Matters:

A matter central to the interests of the Parties in these hearings, is whether the Direct Sales Comparison approach to value employed by the Respondent, or the Capitalized Income approach to value employed by the Complainant, yields the best estimate of market value for the industrial properties under complaint.

In this regard, the Parties questioned whether all of the members of this panel of the Board had, in the course of their participation in previous hearings, heard the evidence, testimony and rebuttal with respect to the 2011 Industrial Cap Rate Evidence for Multiple Roll Numbers, prepared by the Complainant. Both of the side panel Members responded affirmatively, while the Presiding Officer advised that he had not had that opportunity.

The Parties suggested that they would provide a complete, but summarized version of their presentations on the Cap Rate issue. The Parties also requested that their Cap Rate presentations be brought forward and considered in the deliberations and decisions of the Board with respect to a number of individual industrial property assessment complaints scheduled for hearing by this panel of the Board, including the subject property.

The Board had no objection and agreed to proceed as requested by the Parties.

However, it was noted that the Board will be guided by CARB#0522/2010-P, which states that, " the legislation and attendant regulations do not identify the valuation approach chosen by an assessment authority to be the subject of a complaint to, or adjudication by a Composite Assessment Review Board (CARB). CARB's judge the fairness and equity of the assessments which result from the valuation process, not the valuation process itself. The process is subject to audit Under MRAT Article 10 with respect to quality standards, but not to complaint adjudication by CARB's."

Property Description:

The subject property is a 1.40 acre parcel of land located in the Highfield industrial area, improved with one (1) multi- tenanted (IWM) warehouse. The improvement constructed in 1970, represents 41.53% site coverage, and has 25,344 square feet (sf), of net rentable area, with 34.00% office finish. The current assessment amount is $2,610,000 (rounded), or $103 per square foot (psf.), of net rentable area.

Page3of4 CARB 2588/2011-P

Issues:

Does the Current Assessment Amount Exceed the Market Value of the Subject Property?

Is the Current Assessment Amount Equitable when Compared to the Assessments of Similar Properties?

Complainant's Requested Value: $2,080,000 (rounded), or $82 psf., of net rentable area.

However, after further review, the Complainant acknowledged that their evidence was not consistent with the request for a reduced assessment amount, and that confirmation of the current assessment was appropriate.

Board's Decision: The assessment is confirmed at $2,610,000.

DATED AT THE CITY OF CALGARY THIS =\- DAY OF f>Jo\[eaJ 'Qe < 2011.

ir. B.Huelson Presiding Officer

Paqe4of4 CARB 2588/2011-P

NO.

APPENDIX "A"

DOCUMENTS PRESENTED AT THE HEARING AND CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD:

ITEM

1. C1and C2 Complainant Cap Rate Evidence Complainant Rebuttal

Complainant Disclosure Respondent Disclosure

2. C3 (a), and (b) 3. C4 4. R1

An appeal may be made to the Court of Queen's Bench on a question of law or jurisdiction with respect to a decision of an assessment review board.

Any of the following may appeal the decision of an assessment review board:

(a) the complainant;

(b) an assessed person, other than the complainant, who is affected by the decision;

(c) the municipality, if the decision being appealed relates to property that is within

the boundaries of that municipality;

(d) the assessor for a municipality referred to in clause (c).

An application for leave to appeal must be filed with the Court of Queen's Bench within 30 days after the persons notified of the hearing receive the decision, and notice of the application for leave to appeal must be given to

(a) the assessment review board, and

(b) any other persons as the judge directs.

For MGB Administrative Use Only

Decision No. Roll No.

Subject IY/2§. Sub-T'{Qe Issue Issue

CARB Warehouse Multi-tenanted Income approach Cap rate